IT AI Index
Index Vendors › Claude Code · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

Claude Code

71Judge labels
0First choices
18Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in AI coding for mid-market buyers
Rank 13 of 46 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 14% of its 28 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In ai coding · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Claude Code for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
AI coding assistantsDeveloper platform0%13 of 4614%28accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Claude Code yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Claude Code across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.510102
GPT-5.4 mini01001
Gemini 3.5 Flash02013
Perplexity Sonar02103
Grok 4.1 Fast01214
Mistral Small01001
DeepSeek V4 Flash11114
Llama 4 Maverick01001
Qwen 3.7 Flash01001
Kimi K201001
GLM 4.7 FlashX01113
MiniMax M2.503104

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct13 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative23 labels2not counted in share
Budget-constrained8 labelsNone
Scale-constrained8 labelsNone
Negative16 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative71 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 2 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Claude Code is the top-ranked AI coding tool in 2026, powered by Opus 4.6, scoring 80.8% on SWE-bench Verified” Claude Haiku 4.5 · AI coding · comparative prompt · first choice
“*top-performing terminal agent* ... Currently tops SWE-bench (~80%)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AI coding · comparative prompt · first choice
“Tools like Cursor (~$20/user) or Claude Code score higher on context awareness and autonomy” MiniMax M2.5 · AI coding · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“add Claude Code as a metered second tool for the minority doing agentic work” Llama 4 Maverick · AI coding · scale prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Also affected by IDEsaster; 100% of tested tools vulnerable to attack chains” GLM 4.7 FlashX · AI coding · negative prompt · hard negative
“Approach with Extreme Caution: "Agentic" Coding Assistants ... (such as Claude Code, Devin, Cursor, and Windsurf)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AI coding · negative prompt · soft negative
“Over-eagerness: ... "fulfill requests too eagerly" — making changes you didn't ask for” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AI coding · negative prompt · soft negative
“General Risks Across Most (e.g., Cursor, Claude Code, Replit AI)” Grok 4.1 Fast · AI coding · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Claude Code, over the 71 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Claude Code was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
GitHub Copilot70 of 7141Not in the top three
Cursor66 of 719Not in the top three
Tabnine40 of 715Not in the top three
Amazon Q Developer37 of 712Not in the top three
Windsurf27 of 710Not in the top three
Aider13 of 710Not in the top three
Augment Code12 of 710Not in the top three
Sourcegraph Cody12 of 710Not in the top three
Gemini Code Assist11 of 711Not in the top three
OpenAI Codex11 of 710Not in the top three
A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Claude Code. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 62 of the 71 answers that named Claude Code and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

augmentcode.com32
axify.io29
dev.to21
learn.g2.com19
getdx.com14
memeburn.com14
layer3labs.io13
resources.rework.com13
daily.dev12
sourcegraph.com11

178 of the 178 domain citations in answers naming Claude Code came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Claude Code

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Claude Code; a claim can dispute any of them.
Claude Code (Anthropic) 2Anthropic Claude Code (Enterprise) 1Claude Code (by Anthropic) 1Claude Code (via Team plan) 1
Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Claude Code's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Claude Code, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at claude.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.

Subscribe to the pack